Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2020 12:26:21 -0600
From: Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>
To: Michael Banck <michael.banck@credativ.de>
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>,
	Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>,
	Ian Lawrence Barwick <barwick@gmail.com>,
	pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] remove pg_archivecleanup and pg_standby
Message-ID: <20201102182621.GH22691@telsasoft.com>
References: <20201029024412.GP5380@telsasoft.com>
 <d086e56a5884ca7e07a59d39f55b19a767ea221c.camel@credativ.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <d086e56a5884ca7e07a59d39f55b19a767ea221c.camel@credativ.de>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28)
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 08:40:31PM +0100, Michael Banck wrote:
> Am Mittwoch, den 28.10.2020, 21:44 -0500 schrieb Justin Pryzby:
> > Forking this thread:
> > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/fd93f1c5-7818-a02c-01e5-1075ac0d4def@iki.fi

> > I think these are old-fashioned since 9.6 (?), so remove them for v14.
> 
> Why 9.6?

My work doesn't currently bring me in contact with replication, so I've had to
dig through release notes.  I think streaming replication was new in 9.0, and
increasingly mature throughout 9.x.  Maybe someone else will say a different
release was when streaming replication became the norm and wal shipping old.

> > I found it confusing when re-familiarizing myself with modern streaming
> > replication that there are extensions which only help do things the "old way".
> 
> I guess not many will complain about pg_standby going away, but I am
> under the impression that pg_archivecleanup is still used a lot in PITR
> backup environments as a handy tool to expire WAL related to expired
> base backups. I certainly saw hand-assembled shell code fail with "too
> many files" and things when it tried to act on large amount of WAL.

I anticipate you're right, and I'll withdraw 0002.

-- 
Justin